Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mycetoma Laboratory Diagnosis Review Article740
Mycetoma Laboratory Diagnosis Review Article740
Mycetoma Laboratory Diagnosis Review Article740
1 The Mycetoma Research Centre, University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan, 2 Department of Medical
Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC, University of Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
* ahfahal@hotmail.com, ahfahal@uofk.edu
Abstract
Mycetoma is a unique neglected tropical disease caused by a substantial number of
micro- organisms of fungal or bacterial origins. Identification of the causative organism
and the dis- ease extension are the first steps in the management of the affected
patients and predicting disease treatment outcome and prognosis.
Different laboratory-based diagnostic tools and techniques were developed over the
years to determine and identify the causative agents. These include direct microscopy
and cytological, histopathological, and immunohistochemical techniques in addition to the
classi- cal grain culture. More recently, various molecular-based techniques have joined
the myce- toma diagnostic armamentarium. The available mycetoma diagnostic
techniques are of various specificity and sensitivity rates. Most are invasive, time
consuming, and operator dependent, and a combination of them is required to reach a
diagnosis. In addition, they need a well-equipped laboratory and are therefore not field
friendly.
This review aims to provide an update on the laboratory investigations used in the
OPEN ACCESS
diag- nosis of mycetoma. It further aims to assist practising health professionals dealing
with mycetoma by outlining the guidelines developed by the Mycetoma Research
Citation: Ahmed AA, van de Sande W, Fahal
Centre, Uni- versity of Khartoum, WHO collaborating centre on mycetoma following a
AH (2017) Mycetoma laboratory diagnosis:
Review article. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 11(8): cumulative experi- ence of managing more than 7,700 mycetoma patients.
e0005638.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005638
Mycetoma grains
Grains are crucial to establish the diagnosis of the causative organism. Although the grains’
morphological characteristics may provide a rapid provisional identification of the aetiological
agent, in some instances they may be deceiving [1,4,5,8]. Grains have different morphological
features; their size varies from microscopic to 1–2 mm in diameter. Madurella mycetomatis
and A. madurae have large grains, whereas Nocardia brasiliensis, N. cavae, and N. asteroids
grains are small in size [8–11]. Their colour is variable, ranging from black, yellow, white, or
red to pale. Most of eumycetoma causative organisms produce black or pale grains and rarely
yellow, and actinomycetoma commonly is caused by organisms that produce yellow, white, or
red grains [10]. The consistency of most grains is soft, but Streptomyces somaliensis and M.
mycetomatis are quite hard (Fig 2) [1].
Grains are commonly obtained by deep surgical biopsies under aseptic conditions to
avoid contamination. Grains obtained from open sinuses are commonly not viable and
often con- taminated [10].
Fig 2. Photography of surgical biopsy showing a well-encapsulated eumycetoma lesion with numerous black
grains.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005638.g002
The surgical biopsies must be handled immediately by the laboratory technologist in the
surgical theatre. The biopsy should be divided into 2 parts; 1 part for the grains culture and the
other for histopathological examinations. The former is placed in normal saline, while the lat-
ter is placed in 10% formal saline.
Fig 3. KOH wet mount direct microscopic examination of M. mycetomatis grains showing its hyphal
structure.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005638.g003
Several histochemical staining techniques are used for rapid identification of mycetoma
causative agents from culture. Gram staining and the Ziehl–Neelsen (ZN) staining
technique are the commonest in use. Actinomycetoma causative organisms are gram-
positive, while eumycetoma causative organisms are gram-negative [9,10,12]. The
actinomycetes consist of fine, branching filaments, about 1 micron thick, whereas the
eumycetes grains are composed of septate hyphae 4–5 microns thick. The ZN staining
technique is superior in discriminating between actinomycotic agents; Nocardia spp. are ZN
positive, whereas A. madurae and S. somaliensis are ZN negative [9, 10,12].
Grains culture
A sizeable number of grains are needed to culture the causative agents of mycetoma. They
must be soaked and stored in saline for culture, washed several times with normal saline, and
inoculated onto suitable culture media in sterilised conditions using either a safety cabinet or a
flame-sterilised area. Modified Sabouraud agar supplemented with 0.5% yeast extract, blood
agar, brain–heart infusion agar, and Lo¨wenstein agar are the commonly recommended
media.
Antibiotic free culture media is required for the isolation of actinomycetes, while
the eumycetes culture must contain antibiotics. The commonly used antibiotics are
penicillin G (20 U/ml), gentamicin sulphate (400 μg/ml), streptomycin (40 μg/ml), or
chloramphenicol (50 μg/ml).
The mycetoma causative organisms can be identified by their textural description and
mor- phological and biological activities in pure culture. The biological activity may
include acid fastness, optimal temperature, proteolytic activity, utilisation of sugars, and
nitrogenous com- pounds [12].
Nocardia typically produce substrate and aerial hyphae that look like rods and coccoids.
Streptomyces form a yellowish substrate mycelium and lack aerial hyphae, while
identification of Madurella is mainly based on the morphology of the fruiting bodies and
morphology of the colonies (Fig 4) [9,10,12,13].
The phenotypic characteristics of the causative organisms are important for their identifica-
tion. These include the production of β-glucuronidase; degradation of adenine, casein, and
hypoxanthine; growth on adonitol; aesculin hydrolysis; glycerol; glycogen; D-raffinose; L-
rhamnose; D-turanose; D-xylose; and L-aspartic acid. The latter is a sole carbon source and
Type I reaction
In this reaction, the grains are surrounded by a layer of polymorphonuclear leukocytes,
with neutrophils closely attached to the surface of the grain or invading the substance of
the grain. This is surrounded by a layer of cells consisting of plasma cells, macrophages,
lymphocytes, and a few neutrophils in a granulation tissue. Layers of fibrin usually
surround the venules and the capillaries, and the outermost layer of the lesion contains
fibrous tissue (Fig 7).
Type II reaction
In this reaction, the macrophages and multinucleated giant cells replace most of the
neutro- phils. Fragments of the destroyed grains are commonly seen within the
multinucleated giant cells (Fig 8).
Serodiagnosis
Over the years, different serological tests and assays were used for the diagnosis of
mycetoma. These included immunoblots, indirect haemagglutination assays (IHAs),
immunodiffusion (ID), counterimmunoelectrophoresis (CIE), and ELISA (Fig 11) [8,23–
27].
Fig 8. Photomicrograph showing M. mycetomatis and a type II tissue reaction. Haematoxylin and
eosin x 10.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005638.g008
Fig 9. Photomicrograph showing a type III tissue reaction. Haematoxylin and eosin x 10.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005638.g009
Salinas-Carmona and his associates reported on the use of ELISA for the serological diagno-
sis of N. brasiliensis, the most common agent causing actinomycetoma in Mexico [23]. This
study revealed a higher incidence of antibodies in patients with active disease without cross-
reactions with Mycobacterium leprae and M. tuberculosis. This has been useful in cases in
which identification of the aetiological agent in culture was not possible.
For eumycetoma agents, serological assays have been developed only for M.
mycetomatis and P. boydii. For P. boydii, both an ID assay with crude antigens and an IHA
were developed. The ID assay and CIE test for M. mycetomatis were most widely applied
using crude cytoplas- matic antigens [24,25]. CIE was superior to ID since lower antibody
titres were found. Unfortu- nately, since crude antigen preparations were used, cross-
reactivity occurred and reproducibility was low [24,25]. The only serological assays
performed with pure antigens of M. mycetomatis were an ELISA based on the recombinant-
produced translationally controlled tumour protein
Fig 10. Photomicrograph showing M. mycetomatis hyphae and cement substances that are
positive for calcium stained with von Kossa stain.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005638.g010
Fig 11. Photograph showing a counterimmunoelectrophoresis test with positive bands.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005638.g011
(TCTP) and the Luminex assays based on TCTP, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase (FBA), and pyru-
vate kinase (PK) [27,28]. Although patients had higher levels of antibodies, the same levels were
also detected in healthy controls, making the techniques unsuitable as diagnostic tools [27,28].
ELbadawi and associates in 2016 reported on the 75% sensitivity and 95% specificity of
immu- noblotting of M. mycetomatis cytoplasmic antigen from molecularly identified cultures
[29].
It is clear that these serodiagnostic tests have many limitations, which include the tedious
and lengthy preparation of antigens, the fact that the antigens are crude and not standardised,
and the cross-reactivity between different mycetoma causative organisms.
on genetic variation are analyses of electrophoretic karyotype differences and RFLPs using gel
electrophoresis or DNA–DNA hybridization [34–38].
Prior to DNA extraction, the fungi are usually subcultured on Sabouraud agar and
incu- bated at 37˚C for 3 weeks. The mycelia are scraped from the culture medium and
homogenised with sterile pestles and mortar. The homogenised mycelia must then be
snap frozen in liquid nitrogen, thawed and refrozen twice, and rehomogenised in 2 ml of
lysis buffer containing 4 M guanidiniumisothiocyanate, 0.1 M Tris-HCl (pH 6.4), 0.2 M
EDTA, and 0.1% Triton X-
100. Then DNA should be purified by Celite affinity chromatography [12].
The molecular identification of the causal agents of eumycetoma is mainly based on the
ITS that is located between the 18S and 28S genes. The causative agents can be identified to
the spe- cies level by molecular techniques [34–38].
Using a phylogenetic approach, de Hoog and colleagues studied the natural habitat of
Madurella species. Four species of Madurella were included in a large data set of species of
Chaetomidium, Thielavia, Chaetomium, and Papulaspora using sequences of the universal
fun- gal barcode gene rDNA ITS and the partial LSU gene sequence. They demonstrated that
Madurella species are nested within the Chaetomiaceae family [43].
Abdulla and associates in 2003 collected 38 different M. mycetomatis isolates and
analysed the samples by PCR using 20 different primer species. Their result showed a
complete lack of DNA fingerprint variation among the various isolates, and they
concluded that there is little genetic variation among clinically relevant M.
mycetomatis strains from Sudan [42].
In 2005, van de Sande described the genotyping of M. mycetomatis by selective AFLP
and subtype correlation with the geographical origin and lesion size to discriminate
between the strains [39].
Rolling circle amplification (RCA) uses species-specific padlock probes and isothermal
DNA amplification, has high specificity and simplicity, and is of low cost. Ahmed and col-
leagues in 2013 used this technique for the identification of Falciformispora senegalensis,
Falciformispora tompkinsii, M. fahalii, M. mycetomatis, M. pseudomycetomatis, M. tropicana,
Medicopsis romeroi, and T. grisea in a sample of 62 isolates, and the technique produced
100% specificity with no cross-reactivity or false results [37].
Application of isothermal amplification techniques for identification of M. mycetomatis
was used, and the method was found to be reliable and easy to operate. It therefore has the
poten- tial to be implemented in areas where mycetoma is endemic. The techniques may be
expanded to detect fungal DNA from environmental samples [38].
In general, molecular-based techniques for mycetoma causative organisms are attractive, as
they can identify the organism to the species level and thus guide the optimum and appropriate
treatment. However, most are expensive, are not field friendly, and are not available in
endemic areas [34–39].
Genome sequencing is a new insight into the diagnosis of mycetoma, providing data about
the biology and the pathogenicity of the fungi by comparing the genome to other fungi.
M. mycetomatis mm55 was isolated in 1999 at the Mycetoma Research Centre, Khartoum,
Sudan, from an extensive foot mycetoma in a 22-year-old male patient. The strain was isolated
by direct culture of the black grains obtained by a deep biopsy and identified by morphology
after PCR-RFLP and sequencing of the ITS region. Strain mm55 was sequenced and identified
by Smit and colleagues in 2016 [44].
Lucio Vera-Cabrera and associates in 2014 reported on the draft genome sequence of a
member of the Thermomonosporaceae family, A. madurae LIID-AJ290, isolated
from a human case of mycetoma. The assembly contains 10,308,866 bps [45].
Conclusion
In conclusion, accurate identification of the mycetoma causative agent is a prerequisite for the
treatment of the disease. Different diagnostic tools are in use to ensure accurate and precise
diagnosis of mycetoma. Each method or technique has its advantages and disadvantages, and
their specificity and sensitivity are variable. Many factors influence the use of a technique,
among which are the type of the lesion, availability of well-equipped laboratory and expert
Top 5 papers
1. van de Sande WWJ, Fahal AH, Goodfellow M, Mahgoub ES, Welsh O, Zijlstra
EE (2014) Merits and Pitfalls of Currently Used Diagnostic Tools in Mycetoma.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis 8(7): e2918. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0002918
2. van de Sande WWJ, Fahal AH, de Hoog GS, Van Belkum A. (2011) Madurella.
In: Liu D, editor. Molecular detection of human fungal pathogens. Boca Raton:
CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. pp. 117–128.
3. Ahmed SA, van den Ende BH, Fahal AH, van de Sande WW, de Hoog GS. (2014)
Rapid identification of black grain eumycetoma causative agents using rolling
circle amplification. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 4;8(12): e3368.
4. Ahmed SA, van de Sande WW, Desnos-Ollivier M, Fahal AH, Mahmoud NA, de
Hoog GS. (2015) Application of Isothermal Amplification Techniques for
Identifica- tion of Madurella mycetomatis, the Prevalent Agent of Human
Mycetoma. J Clin Microbiol. 53(10):3280–5.
5. Ahmed AO, Mukhtar MM, Kools-Sijmons M, Fahal AH, de Hoog S, van den Ende
BG, et al. (1999) Development of a species-specific PCR RFLP procedure for the
iden- tification of Madurella mycetomatis. J Clin Microbiol. 37(10):3175–8.
References
1. Fahal A, Mahgoub ES, Hassan AME, Abdel-Rahman ME. (2015) Mycetoma in the Sudan: An
Update from the Mycetoma Research Centre, University of Khartoum, Sudan. PLoS Negl Trop
Dis 9(3): e0003679. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0003679 PMID: 25816316
2. Bonifaz A, Tirado-Sa´nchez A, Caldero´n L, Sau´l A, Araiza J, Herna´ndez M, et al. (2014)
Mycetoma: Experience of 482 Cases in a Single Center in Mexico. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 8(8):
e3102. https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003102 PMID: 25144462
3. Fahal A, Mahgoub ES, EL Hassan AM, Jacoub AO, Hassan D. (2015) Head and Neck Mycetoma:
The Mycetoma Research Centre Experience. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 9(3): e0003587.
https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pntd.0003587 PMID: 25768090
4. Fahal AH, Hassan MA. (1991) Mycetoma. Br J Surg. 79(11): 1138–1141.
5. Fahal AH. (2004) Mycetoma: a thorn in the flesh. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 98(1):3–11.
PMID: 14702833
6. Suleiman SH, Wadaella ES, Fahal AH (2016) The Surgical Treatment of Mycetoma. PLoS Negl
Trop Dis 10(6): e0004690. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0004690 PMID: 27336736
7. Hay RJ, Fahal AH. (2015) Mycetoma: an old and still neglected tropical disease. Trans R Soc Trop
Med Hyg. 109(3):169–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/trstmh/trv003 PMID: 25667234
8. van de Sande WWJ, Fahal AH, Goodfellow M, Maghoub ES, Welsh O, Zijlstra EE. (2014) The
merits and pitfalls of the currently used diagnostic tools in mycetoma. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 8(7):
e2918. https:// doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0002918 PMID: 24992636
9. Baveja C. (2010). Medical Mycology. In: Arora DR, Arora BB, editors. Textbook of Microbiology for
Den- tal Students. 3rd ed. Delhi, India: Arya Publications. 322–323.
10. Richardson MD, Warnock DW. (1993) Fungal Infection: Diagnosis and Management. Blackwell
Scien- tific Publications, London.
11. Ponka D, Baddar F. (2014) Microscopic potassium hydroxide preparation. Can Fam Physician.
60 (1):57. PMID: 24452564
12. Kwon-Chung KJ, Bennet JE. Antifungal agents. In: Kwon-Chung KJ, Bennet JE. (1992) Medical
Mycol- ogy. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger. 23–45.
13. Salam Rana S. (2014) Antimicrobial Potential of Actinomycetes Isolated from Soil Samples of
Punjab, India. J Microbiol Exp 1(2): 00010. https://doi.org/10.15406/jmen.2014.01.00010
14. van de Sande WWJ, Fahal AH, de Hoog GS, Van Belkum A. (2011) Madurella. In: Liu D, editor.
Molecu- lar detection of human fungal pathogens. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis
Group. pp. 117– 128.
15. De Hoog GS, Guarro J, Gene J, Figueras M. (2000) Atlas of Clinical Fungi, 2nd ed.
Centraalbureauvoor Schimmel cultures/ Reus Utrecht: Universitat Rovirai Virgili.
16. EL Hag IA, Fahal AH, Khalil EAG. (1996) Fine needle aspiration cytology of Mycetoma. Acta
Cytologica. 40(3): 461–46. PMID: 8669179
17. Yousif BM, Fahal AH, Shakir MY. (2010) a new technique for the diagnosis of mycetoma using
fixed blocks of aspirated material. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 104 (1): 6–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trstmh. 2009.06.015 PMID: 19700179
18. de Hoog GS, Adelmann D, Ahmed AO, van Belkum A. (2004) Phylogeny and typification of
Madurella mycetomatis, with a comparison of other agents of eumycetoma. Mycoses. 47(3–
4):121–30. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0507.2004.00964.x PMID: 15078428
19. Ludwig L, Euzeby J, Schumann P. Road map of the phylum Actinobacteria. In: Goodfellow M, Ka¨
mpfer P, Busse HJ, Trujillo ME, Suzuki KI, Ludwig W, Whitman WB, editors. Bergey’s Manual of
Systematic Bacteriology, 2nd ed, 1992. 1–28.
20. Ibrahim AI, El Hassan AM, Fahal A, van de Sande WW. (2013) A Histopathological Exploration of
the Madurella mycetomatis Grain. PLoS ONE 8(3): e57774.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057774 PMID: 23483927
21. Fahal AH, EL Toum EA, EL Hassan AM, Gumaa SA, Mahgoub ES. (1995) Host tissue
reaction to Madurella mycetomatis: New classification. J Med Vet Mycol. 33: 15–17. PMID:
7650573
22. EL Hassan AM, Fahal AH, EL Hag IA, Khalil EAG. (1994) The pathology of mycetoma: Light
micro- scopic and ultrastructural features. Sudan Med J. 32: 23–45.
23. Salinas-Carmona MC, Welsh O, Casillas SM. (1993) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for
serologi- cal diagnosis of Nocardia brasiliensis and clinical correlation with mycetoma infections. J
Clin Microbiol. 31(11):2901–6. PMID: 8263174
24. Gumaa SA, Mahgoub ES. (1975) Counterimmunoelectrophoresis in the diagnosis of mycetoma
and its sensitivity as compared to immunodiffusion. Sabouraudia. 13: 309–315. PMID: 817400
25. Mahgoub ES. (1964) The value of gel diffusions in the diagnosis of mycetoma. Trans R Soc Trop
Med Hyg. 58: 560–563. PMID: 14217016
26. McLaren ML, Mahgoub ES, Georgakopoulos E. (1978) Preliminary investigation of the use of
the enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in the serodiagnosis of mycetoma.
Sabouraudia. 16: 225–228. PMID: 360443
27. van de Sande WW, Janse DJ, Hira V, Goedhart H, van der Zee R, Ahmed OA, et al. (2006)
Translation- ally controlled tumer protein from Madurella Mycetomatis, a marker for tumerous
Mycetoma progres- sion. J Immunol. 177(3): 1997–2005. PMID: 16849514
28. de Klerk N, de Vogel C, Fahal AH, van belkum A, van de Sande W. (2012) Fructose-bisphosphate
aldol- ase and pyruvate kinase, two novel immunogens in madurella mycetomatis. Med Mycol.
50(2):143–51. https://doi.org/10.3109/13693786.2011.593005 PMID: 21728753
29. ELbadawi HS, Mahgoub E, Mahmoud N, Fahal AH. (2016) Use of immunoblotting in testing
Madurella mycetomatis specific antigen. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 110(5):312–6.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ trstmh/trw023 PMID: 27198216
30. Isik K, Goodfellow M. (2002). Differentiation of nocardia species by PCR-randomly amplified
polymor- phic DNA fingerprint. Syst Appl Microbiol. 25 (1): 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1078/0723-
2020-00084 PMID: 12086190
31. Clarridge JE. (2004) Impact of 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis for identification of bacteria on
clinical microbiology and infectious diseases. Clin Microbiol Rev. 17(4):840–62.
https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR. 17.4.840-862.2004 PMID: 15489351
32. Okhravi N, Adamson P, Mant R, Matheson MM, Midgley G, Towler HM, et al. (1998) Polymerase
chain reaction and restriction fragment length polymorphism mediated detection and speciation of
Candida spp causing intraocular infection. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 39(6):859–66. PMID:
9579465
33. Steingrube VA, Gibson JL, Brown BA, Zhang Y, Wilson RW, Rajagopalan M, Rajagopalan M, et al.
(1995) PCR amplification and restriction endonuclease analysis of a 65-kilodalton heat shock
protein gene sequence for taxonomic separation of rapidly growing mycobacteria. J Clin Microbiol.
33(1):149– 53. PMID: 7699032
34. Ahmed AO, Mukhtar MM, Kools-Sijmons M, Fahal AH, de Hoog S, van den Ende BG, et al. (1999)
Development of a species-specific PCR RFLP procedure for the identification of Madurella
mycetoma- tis. J Clin Microbiol. 37(10):3175–8. PMID: 10488173
35. Ahmed A, van de Sande W, Verbrugh H, Fahal A, van Belkum A. (2003) Madurellal mycetomatis
strains from mycetoma lesions in Sudanese patients are clonal. J Clin Microbiol. 41(10):4537–41.
https://doi. org/10.1128/JCM.41.10.4537-4541.2003 PMID: 14532179
36. Desnos-Ollivier M, Bretagne S, Dromer F, Lortholary O, Dannaoui E. (2006) Molecular
identification of black-grain mycetoma agents. J Clin Microbiol. 44(10):3517–23.
https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00862- 06 PMID: 17021076
37. Ahmed SA, van den Ende BHGG, Fahal AH, van de Sande WWJ, de Hoog GS (2014) Rapid
Identifica- tion of Black Grain Eumycetoma Causative Agents Using Rolling Circle Amplification.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis 8(12): e3368. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0003368 PMID: 25474355
38. Ahmed SA, van de Sande WW, Desnos-Ollivier M, Fahal AH, Mahmoud NA, de Hoog GS. (2015)
Appli- cation of Isothermal Amplification Techniques for Identification of Madurella mycetomatis, the
Prevalent Agent of Human Mycetoma. J Clin Microbiol. 53(10):3280–5.
https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01544-15 PMID: 26246484
39. van de Sande WW, Gorkink R, Simons G, Ott A, Ahmed AO, Verbrugh H, et al. (2005)
Genotyping of Madurella mycetomatis by selective amplification of restriction fragments
(amplified fragment length polymorphism) and subtype correlation with geographical origin and
lesion size. J Clin Microbiol. 43 (9):4349–56. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.43.9.4349-4356.2005 PMID:
16145076
40. de Hoog GS, van Diepeningen AD, Mahgoub el-S, van de Sande WW. (2012) New species of
Madur- ella, causative agents of black-grain mycetoma. J Clin Microbiol. 50(3):988–94.
https://doi.org/10.1128/ JCM.05477-11 PMID: 22205798
41. Mhmoud NA, Ahmed SA, Fahal AH, de Hoog GS, Gerrits van den Ende AH, van de Sande WW.
(2012) Pleurostomophora ochracea, a novel agent of human eumycetoma with yellow grains. J Clin
Microbiol. 50(9):2987–94 https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01470-12 PMID: 22760037
42. Ahmed AOA, Adelmann D, Fahal AH, Verbrugh HA, Van Belkum A, De Hoog S. (2002)
Environmental occurrence of Madurella mycetomatis, major agent of human eumycetoma in
Sudan. J Clin Microbiol. 40(3): 1031–1036. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.40.3.1031-1036.2002 PMID:
11880433
43. de Hoog GS, Ahmed S. Abdalla, Najafzadeh MJ, Sutton DA, Keisari M. Saradeghi, Fahal AH, et al.
(2013) Phylogenetic findings suggest possible new habitat and routes of infection of human
eumyce- toma. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 7(5):e2229. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0002229 PMID: 23696914
44. Smit S, Derks MF, Bervoets S, Fahal A, van Leeuwen W, van Belkum A, et al. (2016)
Genome Sequence of Madurella mycetomatis mm55, Isolated from a Human Mycetoma
Case in Sudan. Genome Announc. 26; 4(3). pii: e00418-16. https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.00418-16
PMID: 27231361
45. Vera-Cabrera L, Ortiz-Lopez R, Elizondo-Gonza´lez R, Campos-Rivera MP, Gallardo-Rocha A,
Molina- Torres CA, et al. (2014) Draft Genome Sequence of Actinomadura madurae LIID-AJ290,
Isolated from a Human Mycetoma Case. Genome Announc. 27; 2(2). pii: e00201-14.